Case law

Gross v. Pirtle

245 F.3d 1151 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Apr 9, 2001

An order denying summary judgment based on qualified immunity necessarily involves a legal determination that certain alleged actions violate clearly established law. Id. at 313. … Gross, we conclude he has failed to establish that Deputy Pirtle’s actions constituted excessive force, and Deputy Pirtle is therefore entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law.

Danny Ray Heggen v. Gary Lee, Hopkins County Sheriff, in Both His Individual and Official Capacities, Hopkins County, Kentucky

284 F.3d 675 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 20, 2002

Defendant also argues that even if Plaintiffs state a valid claim, he is entitled to qualified immunity because the right of deputy sheriffs in Hopkins County to be protected from patronage dismissals was not clearly established … Defendant argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity because when Plaintiffs were discharged, the law was not clearly established that deputy sheriffs in Hopkins County were protected from patronage dismissals.

Hartsfield v. Lemacks

50 F.3d 950 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 14, 1995

A. 13 This court utilizes a two-part analysis for the defense of qualified immunity. … Alabama A & M University, 28 F.3d 1146, 1149 (11th Cir.1994) (en banc) (citations and footnotes omitted). 18 In Lassiter, we explained that for law to be clearly established in the qualified immunity context, "pre-existing

Colon v. Drew

335 F. App'x 86 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Jun 5, 2009

immunity. … The right to be free from deliberate indifference to serious medical injury caused by excessive exposure to ETS is clearly established.

Mediavilla v. City of New York

259 F. Supp. 3d 82 · District Court, S.D. New York · Sep 29, 2016

Qualified Immunity The. doctrine of qualified immunity “gives government officials breathing room to make reasonable but mistaken judgments” by immunizing them from suit for damages unless their conduct violated clearly established … Even if the right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation, however, a defendant will still be entitled to qualified immunity if the defendant’s conduct was objectively reasonable in light of clearly established

Smith v. Reddy

101 F.3d 351 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Nov 27, 1996

Law enforcement officers are entitled to qualified immunity from § 1983 liability arising from their official discretionary acts that do not "violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … If the right was not clearly established at the relevant time or if a reasonable officer might not have known his or her conduct violated that right, the officer is entitled to immunity.

Ajaj v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

25 F.4th 805 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Feb 9, 2022

The defense of qualified immunity is a judicially recognized doctrine that shields government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Thus, the same context that supported a RFRA damages remedy also supported the application of qualified-immunity doctrine, which limits individual liability to violations of clearly established law.

Harris v. City of Cleveland

7 F. App'x 452 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 26, 2001

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, a law enforcement official performing a discretionary function may be immune from civil liability in a Bivens action if his conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … In particular, a plaintiff must establish with particularity that a defendant himself has violated some clearly established statutory or constitutional right in order to strip that person of the protection of qualified immunity

Jerica Moore-Jones v. Anthony Quick

909 F.3d 983 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Nov 28, 2018

Quick is entitled to qualified immunity unless his “conduct violated a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable officer would have known.” Cravener v. … The district court erred in concluding Moore-Jones’s right was clearly established. Quick is entitled to qualified immunity. This also resolves Moore-Jones’s state-law, excessive-force claims. See Baldridge v.

Gordon v. Maesaka-Hirata.

431 P.3d 708 · Hawaii Supreme Court · Nov 2, 2018

As the circuit court initially correctly noted, the “clearly established right” portion of the two-part qualified immunity standard employs a reasonableness test. … In evaluating an official’s claim of qualified immunity, however, courts should not “define clearly established law at a high level of generality.” al-Kidd, 563 U.S. at 742.

Doe v. Bobbitt

881 F.2d 510 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Aug 9, 1989

The sole issue on appeal is whether the defendants are entitled to summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity. … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, public officials performing discretionary functions are protected against suits for damages unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of

Tachias v. Sanders

130 F.4th 836 · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Mar 10, 2025

Qualified Immunity’s “Clearly Established” Prong Accepting the district court’s unchallenged conclusion that Sanders’s actions constituted a violation of the Appellees’ First Amendment rights (see ROA at 33), we … now turn to the “clearly established” prong of qualified immunity.

Charles Daniel Lindsey v. City of Orrick, Missouri, Shirley Taylor

491 F.3d 892 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jun 26, 2007

“Generally, government officials are entitled to qualified immunity under section 1983 when executing discretionary functions, unless the officials violate clearly established law.” Beck, 377 F.3d at 889 . … This court has “taken a broad view of what constitutes ‘clearly established law’ for the purposes of a qualified immunity inquiry.” Sexton, 210 F.3d at 909 (quoting Boswell v.

Jerry Capps v. David Olson

780 F.3d 879 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 16, 2015

(2) Clearly Established Constitutional Right Even if the jury could conclude a constitutional violation occurred, qualified immunity still protects an officer if the right defined in the specific context … of the case was not clearly established.

Gary v. Crouch

867 So. 2d 310 · Supreme Court of Alabama · May 30, 2003

As police chief, Chief Crouch qualifies as a peace officer. However, Lt. … "'[S]ince the privilege under consideration is merely a qualified one, it is subject to the general rules . . . limiting qualified privileged communications; and there is no privilege where the communication is actuated by

Monteiro v. City of Elizabeth

436 F.3d 397 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 8, 2006

Perkins-Auguste as a reasonable public official would have known that her specific conduct violated the Plaintiff's clearly established rights and was not subject to qualified immunity. See Anderson v. … B. 49 The second stage of the qualified immunity analysis is whether, given the existence of a constitutional violation, a reasonable person should have recognized it under "clearly established" law.

Lyttle v. United States

867 F. Supp. 2d 1256 · District Court, M.D. Georgia · Mar 31, 2012

Because their alleged conduct violated clearly established law, the Court rejects their qualified immunity defenses. … Battiste, 261 Fed.Appx. at 202-03 (stating that qualified immunity for failure to train is abrogated only where the officer has fair warning of clearly established law). d.

Vives v. The City Of New York

405 F.3d 115 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 29, 2005

Normally, it is only after making such a determination that a court should ask whether the right allegedly implicated was clearly established at the time of the events in question." County of Sacramento v. … any qualified immunity claim.

Marsha Ann Mettler, Individually and as Trustee for the Heirs of Shawn Michael Mettler v. Edward M. Whitledge, Thomas Haltiner, Ramsey County, Marsha Ann Mettler, Individually and as Trustee for the Heirs of Shawn Michael Mettler v. Edward M. Whitledge, Thomas Haltiner, Ramsey County

165 F.3d 1197 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 25, 1999

Mettler's excessive force claim, because qualified immunity protects them from liability. … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818-19 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982) (saying that government officials have qualified immunity from civil liability under § 1983 "insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

Cyeef-Din v. Onken

District Court, D. New Mexico · Dec 6, 2021

Whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity turns on whether his conduct violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable official would have been aware. … Rickard, 572 U.S. 765, 778 (2014) (reaffirming that officials acting in discretionary capacities are generally entitled to qualified immunity unless their conduct violates clearly established law).